Ok so here we are. We've watched the movie and listened to the play. But nobody has yet dared to ask: what do I, Vincent Piranio, think of it? Well, to put it simply I thought the ending of the movie was much funnier than the end of the play (considering we never read the ending of the play but when comparing the end of the movie to the beginning of the play I do find the former the funnier of the two). Let's get one thing straight right at the beginning. I love awkward romance. I think it's super cringy but it's also stupid funny when it plays out. Personally, I would try to find a happy balance between the two ways in directing the play. In all honesty, my direction is based off my initial perception of each character in the play.
I really liked how Olivia's character was portrayed as this romantic type. I don't really believe that her romance should be seen as funny. If anyone should be treated as a romantic it should be her. Her backstory is quite tragic but it is very glossed over even though it is quite important in terms of the plot and why Viola attempts to work for her. Her love should be seen in its truest form. Truly earnest and selfless for Cesario. I don't really think it should be seen as funny as Scalia puts it. He says that it's funny that she falls in love so fast but I would not direct it like that. In my stage direction, Olivia would be sincerely in love but the audience would feel bad for her because we know the one that she loves does not share the same feelings (Viola/Cesario). Olivia's love would continue not to be reciprocated and Orsino. I think the summarize, Olivia's love should be portrayed as tragic as opposed to the humorous love of Orsino.
Orsino. What a guy. This guy is what the locals call an iron chode. He's hopeless. Loveless. And nobody loves him the same way he loves them. This is where the comedy should be. I think that the play only grazes the comedy of this but the movie hits it spot on. It should be an awkward love. He should be acting like he knows what he's doing but it should be quite obvious to the audience that he does not. The bumbling buffoon of the play, if you will. His love for Olivia is completely idealized. He has no proof that they would be good for each other, and (from what the play has portrayed) has spent no time with her at all. How does he even know he loves her? The loved he has is a joke and should be treated as such.
Augencheek. AKA Asscheek. Is he gay? Bi? Just a flamboyant heterosexual male? Well, the play and the movie see it as much different. I think his dual personality is downplayed extremely hard in the movie and I think in turn the movie missed out on a lot of the comedy Augencheek provided in the play. During Shakespearean times, this flamboyant/homosexual nature was very comedic but in a different way than it would be today. The sassy gay is in, the flamboyant gay is out. I would try to take his character into a modern twist of homosexual behavior.
Ok, the finale. How would I direct Cesario/Viola's love? Well, in my opinion, I don't really think it holds too much weight in terms of the overall plot. I think the main part of the plot is how Orsino like Olivia but Olivia likes Cesario. I, personally, do not think that Viola's love for Orsino really matters. However, if I had to portray her love in any way I would try to find it as funny. I believe that her love holds no purpose for any tragic undertone so it should add the comedy of the overall play. Shakespeare knew what he was doing in trying to make his audience laugh. I think the audio of the play got much closer to the original intent than the movie. If I had to pick one way to do it I would follow the audio. However, I think a combination of both in different ways would be ideal.
No comments:
Post a Comment